Every morning, Alfred would complain about how stressful it was to drive to office. Heavy traffic. Inconsiderate road users. And the traffic snarls from accidents caused by some ‘idiots’ as he would refer to those involved. He would enter the office in a foul mood and take hours if at all for him to simmer down.

Know anyone like Alfred?

Mabel on the other hand never complained about how stressful it was to drive in morning rush hour. She would enter the office with a cheerful greeting to all she met, including the security guard, office cleaner and coffee lady. She was the life of the office and people gravitated to her good nature and cheery demeanour.

Know anyone like Mabel?

What was Alfred doing wrong and Mabel doing right?

To begin with, while Alfred sought out someone or something to blame—externalised his problems—Mabel internalised her responsibility, she looked within and took charge of her happiness. This was all the more remarkable, as she too used the same route taken by Alfred and, in fact, lived in the same neighbourhood.

This is how she ensured a stress-free drive to the office:

Mabel departed from her home on time. She was never a minute late, for she knew in the morning rush, every minute—every minute—added traffic to the roads.

She knew her route very well—in minute detail. Once she left her home, she would get onto the lane that entailed minimum lane switching. She would not switch lanes just to squeeze into one car length ahead, for Mabel knew this meant unnecessary stress and worse, the risk of accidents. When traffic slowed, she would remain in her lane. She had already factored in the time.

She always filtered into lanes by getting behind the next car—not racing to cut in front of the next car.

She always gave advance signals of her intentions and maintained adequate gap from the car ahead.

If for whatever reason, traffic held her up, she will not let the delay irritate her into committing rash manoeuvres. On such occasions, Mabel would think of her loved ones and how much her safety meant to the people at home. And she would call in and inform her boss or co-worker that she was running late. She used a hands-free phone kit.

Mabel practised safe driving. She took charge of her well-being. She always arrived cheerful at the office.

Be the Mabel in your office. And driving—even in rush hour—can be pleasant and stress free. You will be ready and calm and make good quality decisions. You owe this to your co-workers and more importantly to yourself.

Great team builders know that more than quantity, it is quality that counts. The team is made up of individuals and will succeed or collapse dependent on its weakest link.

2. Why don’t hiring managers chose the best people?

There are many reasons and here are a few (feel free to share your points in the comments below):

They’re unable to recognize the best – the most talented.

They do not know what they’re looking for in people.

They confuse paper qualifications and “years of experience” for expertise.

They’re fearful of bringing in people who might outshine them.

And many more…

3. Is it not true the more the talented, the more an employer has to pay?

Most people speak in general terms and this is part of the problem. Instead of asking the right questions, they seek the “right” answers. Getting the right answer to a wrong question is not progress, not productive. However, even a wrong answer to a right question sets you on the path of progress.

Instead of seeking the “most talented” the question should be – How do I select the most talented (the best) from a given class of candidates?

This leads us to the next question.

4. How do I determine the class of people?

You do this by clearly defining the following:

The job’s scope – what exactly do you want that employee to accomplish. The more detailed, the better.

The job’s requirements – both objective or hard skills (paper credentials, years of experience, etc) and subjective elements such as soft skills.

An overview of the remuneration package on offer.

These three criteria will attract the right people, or people who consider themselves qualified.

Use the objective/hard skills as a funnel to shortlist candidates, people who meet ALL the requirements (excluding the soft skills) – and this will be your class of applicants.

During your selection process, zero in on the soft skills you desire and you will have your best-in-class. You’re not paying more but paying the same to chose the best from a given class of candidates.

5. Let us be candid here, as a salaried manager, if I chose someone better than me, I risk losing out on promotions and even my job. Do you expect me to chose what is good for my employer over what is good for me?

A pointed question and it’s a very valid question. Answer pending…

###

Note: I shall upload more questions and answers in this post, and welcome you to “follow” my blog so that you’re kept updated.

Meanwhile, enjoy this short clip: Quality over Quantity is what makes a winner!

In interviewing and selecting candidates, most hiring managers excel in identifying hard skills. Practitioners also refer to Hard Skills as Tangibles, Objective Criteria and variations thereof.

That being the case, these are some broad classification of hard skills:

Paper qualifications

Specific industry exposure

Specific technical skills

Years of experience

Specific languages skills

Age (See below)

Nationality – jobs open to citizens and permanent residents

Etcetera

The key to classifying Hard Skills is objectivity.

Does the candidate have a specific paper qualification – Yes/No. Does the candidate have minimum years of experience in a particular or related industry – Yes/No.

The challenge is in identifying what HR practitioners broadly refer to as Soft Skills – the Intangible Character traits; the Subjective Criteria and elusive X-Factor that defines a great employee from an ‘also ran’ or worse, a destructive addition to the Team.

Over the years, many models and theories sprouted. High-end placement agencies (colloquially referred to as headhunters) even developed and jealously guard their in-house models.

One measure of success is the fees paid versus the results. By this measure, all have had varying degrees of success.

Soft skills continue to remain the challenge.

Even identifying soft skill traits is a challenge – let alone measuring and valuing these skills.